From: A systematic review of determinants of sedentary behaviour in youth: a DEDIPAC-study
 | Related to sedentary behaviour | Unrelated to sedentary behaviour | Summary code1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | Reference number | Direction of association | Reference number | n/N for row (%)2 | Association (+/−)3 |
Individual variables: biological/genetic | |||||
 Gender | 54b | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
 Age (older) | 36b, 36g, 39b, 39g, 39, 39, 39, 39, 54b, 54g, 57b, 57g | + | 15, 15 | 12/14 (86 %) | ++ |
 Birth weight |  |  | 29 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 SES (high) | 39, 39 | + |  | 2/2 (100 %) | + |
Individual variables: psychological/behavioural | |||||
 Depressive symptoms |  |  | 51b, 51g | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
Interpersonal variables: social | |||||
 Family influences | |||||
  Number of parents living at home |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Number of siblings | 39 | - | 39 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
 Parental behaviour | |||||
  Paternal PA | 39b | + | 39g, 39, 39 | 1/4 (25 %) | 0 |
  Paternal TV/computer use (weekdays) |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Paternal TV/computer use (weekend days) | 39 | + | 39 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
  Maternal PA |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Maternal TV/computer use (weekdays) |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Maternal TV/computer use (weekend days) | 39 | + | 39 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
 Family behaviour | |||||
  Going to the park as a family | 39b | - | 39g, 39 | 1/3 (33 %) | 0 |
  Playing sports as a family | 39b | - | 39g, 39 | 1/3 (33 %) | 0 |
  Visiting relatives as a family |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Reading as a family |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Watching TV as a family |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
 Rules and restrictions | |||||
  Bedtime rules |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Restriction for playing outside | 39g | + | 39b, 39 | 1/3 (33 %) | 0 |
  Rules for playing after dark |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Indoor play rules |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Restriction for SB |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
 Parental perceptions | |||||
  Parents believe there is a high crime rate in their neighbourhood |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Parents consider stranger danger to be a concern |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Social network | |||||
  Social network score |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Social trust and cohesion score |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Ostracism (social support) | 46, 46, 46, 46 | + |  | 4/4 (100 %) | + |
Environmental variables | |||||
 Home | |||||
  Shared bedroom | 39 | - | 39 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
  Electronic games at home | 39 | - | 39 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
  Active games instead of traditional electronic games | 56 | - | 56, 56, 56 | 1/4 (25 %) | 0 |
  Removal of traditional electronic games | 56 | - | 56, 56, 56 | 1/4 (25 %) | 0 |
  Electronic equipment in the bedroom | 39, 39 | - | 38, 38 | 2/4 (50 %) | ? |
  Computer in the bedroom |  |  | 38, 38, 38 | 0/3 (0 %) | 0 |
  TV in the bedroom |  |  | 38, 38, 38 | 0/3 (0 %) | 0 |
Neighbourhood | |||||
  Urbanisation |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Area-level deprivation |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Living in a cul-de-sac |  |  | 39, 39, 52 | 0/3 (0 %) | 0 |
  Neighbourhood play rules |  |  | 39, 39 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Parents are satisfied with quality of parks and playgrounds in their neighbourhood |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Distance to closest public open space from home |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: area of closest park to home |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: number of recreational facilities |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: number of playgrounds |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: number of amenities |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: walking paths |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: cycling paths |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: lighting along paths |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: trees providing shade |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: water feature |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Closest park: signage regarding dogs |  |  | 52 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Safety of walking/jogging in the neighbourhood |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Walkers/bikers on the streets can be easily seen by people at home |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Much crime in the neighbourhood |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Good lighting in the streets |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Much traffic, difficulties to walk |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Children frequently play outdoors |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Many interesting things to look at in the neighbourhood |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Many places to go within easy walking distance of home |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Sidewalks on most of the streets |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Bicycle/walking trails |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Easy access to 14 specified facilities (e.g. basketball court) |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Difficulties to get home from after-school activity at school |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Difficulties to get to an after school activity not at school |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Difficulties to get home from an activity someplace else |  |  | 45g | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 School | |||||
  Location town fringe |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Location village/hamlet dwelling (urban) | 34 | + | 34 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
  School size (number of pupils in year 4) | 34 | - | 34 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
  School ground supportiveness for PA |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Aesthetics score |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Playground area |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Playground density | 37, 37, 37, 37, 37, 37, 37 | + | 37, 37, 37 | 7/10 (70 %) | + |
  Existence of a bike rack |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of an entrance for pedestrians/cyclists only |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Walking access supportiveness for PA |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Cycling access supportiveness for PA | 34 | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
  Existence of gym facility |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of indoor sports facility |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of sports field/pitch facility |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of pool facility |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of changing facilities | 34 | + |  | 1/1 (100 %) | + |
  Existence of play equipment | 34 | + |  | 1/1 (100 %) | + |
  Existence of sports equipment | 34 | + |  | 1/1 (100 %) | + |
  Use of local park or playground |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Medium or high quality of sports facilities |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Physical activity facility supportiveness for PA |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Other facility supportiveness for PA |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 School neighbourhood | |||||
  Existence of heavy traffic |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Proportion of A-roads |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Number of traffic accidents per km of road |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of pathways near school |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Existence of safe places to cross roads | 34 | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
  Cars drive slowly |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Streets are safe to walk or ride |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Easy to get to school by foot |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Number of PA facilities per km2 |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  m2 verge per m of road |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Percentage of accessible land |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Effective walkable area ratio |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Connected node ratio |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Herfindahl-hirschman index (diversity of land uses in the school neighbourhood to measure environmental supportiveness) |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
  Streets are free from rubbish |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Time | |||||
  Specific day of the week |  |  | 54b, 54g | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
  Time of the day (school time vs out of school time (reference)) | 54b, 54g | - |  | 2/2 (100 %) | - |
Policy variables: industry | |||||
 Advertisement |  |  | 58 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
Policy variables: government | |||||
 Participation in healthy school programme |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
 Provision of PA information |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
 Provision of health promotion information | 34 | + | 34 | 1/2 (50 %) | ? |
 Provision of risks of unhealthy lifestyle information |  |  | 34, 34 | 0/2 (0 %) | 0 |
 Hours of physical education | 34 | + |  | 1/1 (100 %) | + |
 Extracurricular PA before school |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Extracurricular PA during lunch breaks |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Extracurricular PA during weekends | 34 | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
 Duration of morning break (>15 minutes) | 34 | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
 Duration of lunch break | 34 | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
 Breaks: allowed to play outside in bad weather |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Breaks: screenplay allowed |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Breaks: >2 PA allowed |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Existence of breakfast club |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Existence of lollypop person (e.g. crossing guard) | 34 | - |  | 1/1 (100 %) | - |
 Existence of park and stride |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Existence of travel plan |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Existence of walking bus |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Provision of cycle training |  |  | 34 | 0/1 (0 %) | 0 |
 Provision of pedestrian training | 34 | + |  | 1/1 (100 %) | + |